The Political Dynamics of Justice Reform in The U.S.

• That is especially true in a campaign year fueled by anger and fear. Proponents
of reform – pointing to the experience of several red states like Texas, Georgia,
Mississippi and Utah – say it has become safe for politicians to be “smart on
crime” rather than merely tough on crime. But surges of murder in several major
cities, televised protests against police behavior, and fear-mongering by some
presidential candidates have contributed to a perception – never mind the facts –
that crime is rising ominously.
• The heroin epidemic — which has hit especially hard in white suburbs, a.k.a.
swing voter territory — may have made politicians wary of legislation that mainly
benefits drug offenders in federal custody. Of course, in contrast to earlier heroin
binges that hit black neighborhoods most heavily, this is being billed more as a
health problem than a crime problem. But only up to a point: New Hampshire’s
attorney general has proposed to begin charging drug dealers with second
degree murder if their customers overdose.
• Many Republicans would rather stick pencils in their eyes than pass something
President Obama could claim as a legacy. Conversely, some Democrats fear the
president wants a bill so badly he’ll settle for a bad bill. Last week the president
met privately with the hardline chairmen of the House and Senate judiciary
committees, no Democrats invited. Much speculation ensued about what deal the
president might have cut.
• Congressional process favors defense over offense. In the Senate, any member
can demand “regular order,” which means the bill is open to amending. And
Page 103 of 262